Madhava Reddy Yami Reddy , Nalgonda V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Nalgonda

ITA 330/Hyd/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8055 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-11-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-A
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 28-06-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

ITA Nos.330 and 331/Hyd/2020 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad (Through Video Conferencing) Before Shri A. Mohan Alankamony, Accountant Member AND Shri S.S. Godara, Judicial Member ITA Nos.330 and 331/Hyd/2020 Assessment Years: 2009-10 and 2010-11 Madhava Reddy Yami Reddy, C/o. Katrapati & Associates, 1-1- 298/2/B/3, 1 st Floor, Ashok Nagar, Hyderabad. PAN : ANZPY1378B. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Nalgonda. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad. Revenue by : Shri M. Mahidhar. Date of hearing: 02.09.2021 Date of pronouncement: 22/11/2021 O R D E R Per S. S. Godara, J.M. These assessee’s appeals for A.Ys 2009-10 and 2010-11 arise from the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Hyderabad’s separate orders; both dated 10.07.2018 passed in case No.0697 & 0696/Income Tax Officer-1/NGL/CIT(A)-3/2016-17, respectively involving proceedings under section 143(3) r.ws. 147 of Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, “the Act”). Heard both the parties. Case files perused. ITA Nos.330 and 331/Hyd/2020 2 2. The captioned appeals filed by the assessee are barred by limitation by 629 days. The assessee has moved a petition requesting the bench to condone the delay. We heard the party on this preliminary issue. Having regard to the reasons given in the petition, we condone the delay and admit the appeals for hearing. 3. We notice at the outset that both the orders of lower authorities under challenge affirming the assessing officer’s action making long term capital gain additions of Rs.1,83,13,976/- and Rs.2,38,65,815/-; assessment year wise, respectively, have been passed ex-parte. Coupled with this, there is further no indication as to whether the assessee had been served the corresponding last lower appellate hearing notice(s) or not. 4. Learned departmental representative further fails to rebut the clinching fact that both the lower authorities have invoked section 50C of the Act without making the statutory reference under sub section (2) thereof as held mandatory in the case of Sunil Kumar Agarwal Vs CIT 372 ITR 83 (Calcutta). We therefore deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant twin appeals back to the Assessing Officer for his appropriate adjudication afresh as per law within three effective opportunities of hearing after making the statutory reference. Ordered accordingly. 5. No other ground has been pressed before us. ITA Nos.330 and 331/Hyd/2020 3 6. Theses assessee’s twin appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 22 nd November, 2021. Sd/- Sd/- (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (S.S. GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Hyderabad, dated 22 nd November, 2021. TYNM/sps Copy to: S.No Addresses 1 Madhava Reddy Yami Reddy, C/o. Katrapati & Associates, 1-1- 298/2/B/3, 1 st Floor, Ashok Nagar, Hyderabad. 2 The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Nalgonda. 3 CIT (A) – 3, Hyderabad. 4 Pr. CIT – 3, Hyderabad. 5 DR, ITAT Hyderabad Benches 6 Guard File By Order